Editor’s note: This article is part of the Bracket Central series, an inside look at the run-up to the men’s & women’s NCAA Tournaments, along with analysis and picks during the tournaments.

The biggest bracketology story from the past week — outside of the games, of course — was the NCAA Tournament selection committee’s reveal of the top 16 seeds last Saturday. That reveal and the ensuing interview with selection committee chair Keith Gill garnered many headlines, attempting to parse Gill’s words to find clues about the committee’s overall approach. While Gill did offer some hints, the bigger hint for bubble purposes came from a different NCAA source.

Last week in Indianapolis, the NCAA staged a mock selection committee exercise attended by many members of the college basketball media. A variety of personalities were present, and the most crucial takeaway was NCAA vice president of men’s basketball Dan Gavitt’s pointed mention of the importance of Wins Above Bubble for selecting NCAA Tournament teams.

NCAA VP of Basketball Dan Gavitt highlighting the importance of Wins Above Bubble when it comes to selecting the field.

“Not the be-all end-all … but WAB takes on more importance, certainly than it did three or four years ago.”

— Jeff Borzello (@jeffborzello) February 19, 2026

“Wins above bubble is important, especially when it comes to selecting teams [in the field].”

Dan Gavitt was asked about which metrics are important, and while he did mention several different components, WAB was the one metric he went out of his way to emphasize. https://t.co/6TufdPAgqA

— Evan Miyakawa (@EvanMiya) February 19, 2026

Wins Above Bubble, or WAB, is a new metric added to the NCAA’s team sheets ahead of last year’s tournament. It attempts to measure how much better or worse a specific team did against its own schedule than what would be expected of a generic bubble-caliber team. In other words: How many wins did you amass, and how many more or less is that than a bubble team would have?

That approach has multiple benefits. Most importantly, it provides one number to directly compare teams with drastically different strengths of schedule.

For a real-world example: Using the NET rankings to measure opponent quality, a bubble team would be expected to have won 14.09 games so far against Auburn’s wildly difficult schedule. Auburn currently has 15 wins, which puts the Tigers at +0.91 WAB. That same generic bubble team would be expected to accumulate 25.87 wins against Miami (Ohio)’s schedule. The Redhawks are 28-0, so they are at +2.13 WAB. That’s a one-to-one comparison to show that Miami has accomplished more than Auburn, despite a galactic gulf in schedule strength.

Furthermore, WAB makes every game matter. Rather than a microscopic focus on Quadrant 1 wins and Quadrant 3 losses, this all-encompassing metric captures the results of every single game on a team’s schedule. That nuance prevents arbitrary cutoffs — like the difference between a home win over No. 30 in the NET (Q1) or No. 31 (Q2) — from skewing our perception.

Flaws remain. WAB does not adjust for injuries/player absences, and it is only as strong as the tool being used to value the teams: the NET itself. But its ability to equalize across all levels of teams makes it as fair a tool as any.

Because of WAB’s stated importance to the selection process, we have added where each team ranks in the metric to our bubble breakdowns below. Hopefully, this helps visualize what the selection committee will be looking at over the next couple of weeks.

Check out the primer below before you dive in; many of the key terms will be repeated throughout the article. And for a projection of the actual bracket, here’s Joe Rexrode’s latest Bracket Watch.

Teams are listed alphabetically within their sections.
Locks are teams that have reached a 100 percent chance to make the NCAA Tournament, per Bart Torvik’s TourneyCast. This blends both current resume and forward-looking projections.
Should Be In teams are a few wins from Lock status and not really in much danger of missing the dance right now.
In the Mix teams are the true bubble cases.
On the Fringe teams are a win or two away from true bubble consideration — a win away from being a couple of wins away.
Resume metrics are backward-looking and try to measure a team’s accomplishments. Think: “What has this team done?” These metrics are more important for selection to the field.
Quality metrics are forward-looking and attempt to project future performance. Think: “How good is this team?” These metrics are more influential for seeding.
Movement

Up to Lock: Iowa, UCF, Wisconsin
Up to Should Be In: Georgia, Saint Mary’s
Up to In the Mix: Cincinnati
Added to On the Fringe: Nevada
Down to In the Mix: None
Down to On the Fringe: West Virginia
Dropped from On the Fringe: Stanford

Current totals

Locks: 28
Should Be In: 7
In the Mix: 21
On the Fringe: 6

ACC

Locks: Duke, Louisville, North Carolina, Virginia
Should Be In: Clemson, Miami (Fla.), NC State, SMU
In the Mix: California, Virginia Tech
On the Fringe: None

Should Be In

Clemson (20-8, 10-5; WAB rank: 38)
What They Need: OK, Tigers, it is time to stop the bleeding. A four-game slide has turned what looked like a surefire NCAA Tournament team into a group battling to stay out of the bubble discussion. As of now, Clemson’s overall profile is narrowly above the true danger zone, but another 0-2 week would generate panic. The schedule is no joke, either: hosting Louisville on Saturday, visiting North Carolina on Tuesday. We are closely monitoring what could be a devastating drop out of the field should the losses continue piling up.

Miami (Fla.) (22-6, 11-4; WAB rank: 28)
What They Need: We toyed with the idea of moving Miami up to a Lock. However, a home loss to Boston College on Saturday might be damaging enough to set off alarms in Coral Gables, so we are going to ask the Hurricanes to win one more game. This past week’s efforts — a near miss at Virginia, a road win at FSU — resemble that of an NCAA Tournament team, so it would be shocking to see Jai Lucas’ squad collapse at this point. Credit to him and the players for immediately flipping things from a disastrous 2024-25 season headlined by coach Jim Larrañaga’s mid-year exit.

NC State (19-9, 10-5; WAB rank: 34)
What They Need: Go big or go home, I guess? After the Wolfpack went big against rival UNC last week (24-point win), they ran home with their tails between their legs on Tuesday, falling at Virginia 90-61. That keeps them in solid-but-not-safe territory for another week. This week brings a trip to disappointing Notre Dame and a visit from top-ranked Duke on Big Monday, so the Wolfpack still have a lot of variability.

In The Mix

California (20-8, 8-7; WAB rank: 43)
Profile Strengths: Four Q1 wins, zero bad losses.
Profile Weaknesses: Awful nonconference strength of schedule, poor quality metrics.
Looking Ahead: That’s how you do it, Golden Bears! Mark Madsen’s team completed a sweep of archrival Stanford and also picked off SMU this week, markedly improving what had previously been a borderline bubble case. Cal should be far from content, though, and absolutely must avoid a Q3 loss when hosting Pitt and visiting Georgia Tech. To quote Bachman-Turner Overdrive, this is a week for takin’ care of business.

SMU (19-9, 8-7; WAB rank: 39)
Profile Strengths: Strong resume metrics, zero bad losses.
Profile Weaknesses: No headlining Q1A wins.
Looking Ahead: The Ponies trounced Boston College before losing the first leg of their Bay Area trip at Cal. That was the ideal outcome for the ACC as a whole, but it keeps SMU’s forecast slightly tepid. Andy Enfield’s group remains a bubble team, albeit one of the more comfortable ones at this point. The upcoming week offers tricky but winnable contests: completing the California trip at Stanford, then coming home to Dallas to host Miami (Fla.) on Wednesday.

Virginia Tech (18-10, 7-8; WAB rank: 50)
Profile Strengths: Decent resume metrics.
Profile Weaknesses: Poor quality metrics, took an ugly Q3 home loss.
Looking Ahead: The Hokies easily handled Wake Forest in their lone contest since the last Watch, setting themselves up for a massive final trio of games. That run starts with a trip to UNC on Saturday, and a Q1A win in Chapel Hill would get Virginia Tech into realistic at-large territory. As it stands now, the Hokies are likely just outside the field. They also need to take care of business against Boston College on Tuesday.

Big 12

Locks: Arizona, BYU, Houston, Iowa State, Kansas, Texas Tech, UCF
Should Be In: None
In the Mix: Cincinnati, Oklahoma State, TCU
On the Fringe: Arizona State, West Virginia

In the Mix

Cincinnati (15-13, 7-8; WAB rank: 67)
Profile Strengths: Two high-end Q1A wins, strong quality metrics.
Profile Weaknesses: Possess a Q4 loss, poor resume metrics.
Looking Ahead: The Bearcats probably do not belong at this level, considering their WAB and overall shaky record. But dominating Kansas at Allen Fieldhouse to go with a win against Iowa State has Wes Miller’s team in the ballpark. Cincinnati almost certainly needs to win out, but that could be doable considering how well the squad is playing. Their next two tests are at home: vs. Oklahoma State (Saturday) and vs. BYU (Tuesday), both of whom lost a key starter to a knee injury in the past two weeks. We’ll keep an eye on the Bearcats.

Oklahoma State (17-11, 5-10; WAB rank: 54)
Profile Strengths: No bad losses.
Profile Weaknesses: 1-8 Q1 record, awful quality metrics.
Looking Ahead: Oklahoma State’s Big 12 record is a major blemish, as is its lack of headlining wins. But the Cowboys rank well above the other fringe Big 12 bubble candidates (Arizona State, Cincinnati, West Virginia) in WAB. It goes to show that keeping your bad loss column clean goes a long way in maintaining competitive resume metrics. Oklahoma State is still a long shot to make the field, particularly after key big man Parsa Fallah suffered a potentially serious knee injury late in the OT win over West Virginia. The next two games, road tests at Cincinnati (Saturday) and UCF (Tuesday), are major chances for more Q1 victories, but winning them will be incredibly challenging.

TCU (18-10, 8-7; WAB rank: 45)
Profile Strengths: Four Q1 wins, 8-8 vs. top two quadrants.
Profile Weaknesses: Q3 and Q4 losses.
Looking Ahead: After two home wins against fringe bubble rivals Arizona State and West Virginia, TCU has scratched and clawed its way to the cusp of the field. That is a remarkable accomplishment considering how the season began. The weekend brings a Q2 road chance at Kansas State and its interim coach, followed by a massive-upside swing at Texas Tech on Tuesday. With the Red Raiders missing JT Toppin, that game looks a lot more winnable. A road sweep this week would see the Horned Frogs into the field.

Big East

Locks: St. John’s, UConn, Villanova
Should Be In: None
In the Mix: Seton Hall
On the Fringe: None

In The Mix

Seton Hall (19-9, 9-8; WAB rank: 56)
Profile Strengths: 5-4 road record.
Profile Weaknesses: Iffy metrics, only one Q1 win.
Looking Ahead: Seton Hall’s fringe case needed a win, and while the Pirates did manage that against Georgetown, it was a gruesome game. The Pirates went 0-for-18 from beyond the arc in a 51-47 win, and they may now be in danger of failing the eye test. They desperately need to beat UConn (away) or St. John’s (home) in the final week, and truthfully, they may need both. Oh, and Shaheen Holloway’s team needs to avoid a loss in a tricky road game at Xavier in between those two weekend showdowns.

Big Ten

Locks: Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Nebraska, Purdue, Wisconsin
Should Be In: None
In the Mix: Indiana, Ohio State, UCLA, USC
On the Fringe: None

In The Mix

Indiana (17-11, 8-9; WAB rank: 49)
Profile Strengths: Two excellent high-end Q1A victories, terrific quality metrics.
Profile Weaknesses: 4-11 against the top two quadrants.
Looking Ahead: Oh dear, Indiana. That was an awful week for an at-large hopeful. First, the Hoosiers no-showed at Mackey Arena, falling by 29 to archrival Purdue. Then, they blew a double-digit lead at home against Northwestern to take their first loss outside of Q1 (fortunately, it’s just a Q2 loss for now). IU is now well below .500 against NCAA Tournament-caliber teams, and the Hoosiers’ fate would be squarely in the committee’s hands if the season ended today. They have a huge chance to bounce back on Sunday against Michigan State before a revenge chance against Minnesota on Wednesday.

Ohio State (17-11, 9-8; WAB rank: 46)
Profile Strengths: No bad losses, competitive metrics.
Profile Weaknesses: Awful 1-10 record against Q1.
Looking Ahead: Thanks to Northwestern winning at Indiana and sneaking into the NET top 75, Ohio State is now the proud owner of one (1) Quad 1 victory. That may not last, though, and the Buckeyes’ 0-2 week on the road further damaged their already ugly record against top competition. The comparison to last year’s UNC resume is obvious: The Heels snuck into the First Four despite dismal results against Q1 thanks to Q2 success and a clean resume. Ohio State can change the outlook by beating Purdue on Sunday, but if it cannot, a road win Wednesday at Penn State will merely be a drop in the bucket, resume-wise.

UCLA (19-9, 11-6; WAB rank: 33)
Profile Strengths: No bad losses, 9-9 record vs. top two quadrants, strong metrics.
Profile Weaknesses: 3-8 record away from home.
Looking Ahead: Quite simply, it was a massive week for the Bruins. They went 2-0, earning a Q1A win against Illinois and then creating distance from bubble rival (and crosstown rival) USC with a convincing 19-point victory. Mick Cronin’s sideline and press conference antics notwithstanding, UCLA is now in outstanding shape for an NCAA Tournament bid. The Bruins’ biggest profile flaw is that they have only one win outside the Pacific time zone, and Saturday’s trip to Minnesota presents the last regular season chance to change that. Getting a split between that game and hosting Nebraska on Tuesday would further propel UCLA into the field.

USC (18-10, 7-10; WAB rank: 47)
Profile Strengths: Strong Q1+Q2 record.
Profile Weaknesses: Took a Q3 loss.
Looking Ahead: It is difficult to survive 0-2 weeks while on the bubble in February. It is especially challenging when one of those losses is a Q3 home defeat, as USC’s stumble against Oregon was. The Trojans followed that up by getting shelled at crosstown rival UCLA, and they are moving quickly in the wrong direction. A small positive: What previously was a Q3 home loss to Northwestern is now Q2. USC has opportunities this week via Q1 chances vs. Nebraska (Saturday) and at Washington (Wednesday), but their four-game losing streak offers little reason for hope.

SEC

Locks: Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
Should Be In: Georgia, Kentucky
In the Mix: Auburn, Missouri, Texas, Texas A&M
On the Fringe: None

Should Be In

Georgia (19-9, 7-8; WAB rank: 37)
What They Need: The Bulldogs had a perfectly acceptable week, beating Texas at home before losing competitively at Vanderbilt. That keeps them safely ahead of any truly risky territory, even with a Q3 loss lingering on the resume. Georgia can punch its ticket with a home sweep this week, hosting South Carolina on Saturday and Alabama on Tuesday. A split would maintain comfortable status, even though the Gamecocks would threaten to be a Q3 loss.

Kentucky (18-10, 9-6; WAB rank: 26)
What They Need: The Wildcats were a highly dubious call at Auburn away from locking up their bid this week. They did win at South Carolina on Tuesday, ensuring they remain comfortably above the cutline. For the Watch’s money, Kentucky is now a single win away from punching a ticket to the NCAA Tournament. Unfortunately, capturing that win will be a major challenge, as Kentucky has three brutal Q1 games left: home against Vanderbilt, at Texas A&M, home against Florida.

In The Mix

Auburn (15-13, 6-9; WAB rank: 42)
Profile Strengths: Solid metrics, five Q1 wins, no bad losses.
Profile Weaknesses: Quantity of losses.
Looking Ahead: Sound the alarms at Toomer’s Corner. After Auburn took its 13th loss on Tuesday (and sixth in its last seven games), Steven Pearl’s debut season may result in missing the NCAA Tournament. The Tigers’ metrics are still solid, but they are pushing the limits of acceptability with their overall record. One more regular season defeat would doom them to at least 15 losses (they would need an SEC Tournament loss to be in the at-large pool). Fortunately, the next two are winnable home games: Ole Miss on Saturday and LSU on Tuesday. That would set up a gigantic finale at archrival Alabama.

Missouri (19-9, 9-6; WAB rank: 35)
Profile Strengths: Five Q1 wins, 9-9 record vs. top two quadrants, no bad losses.
Profile Weaknesses: Zero notable nonconference wins.
Looking Ahead: After knocking off Tennessee on Tuesday, Missouri is making passing glances at Should Be In status. The resume is clean and packed with top-end quality, so despite their lagging quality metrics, the Tigers are likely safe as of today. This week presents some tricky road games, though, with trips to non-NCAA Tournament teams in Mississippi State (Saturday) and Oklahoma (Tuesday). A split would keep Dennis Gates’ team in solid shape.

Texas A&M (19-9, 9-6; WAB rank: 40)
Profile Strengths: Strong metrics, no bad losses, three outstanding Q1A victories.
Profile Weaknesses: Poor nonconference SOS.
What They Need: The Aggies picked up another Q1 win at Oklahoma while splitting this week’s road trip, and their strong profile nearly warranted a step up in category this week. Perhaps their biggest bubble advantage: The schedule has no more games worse than high Q2 left, which means no more bad loss opportunities. Adding just one more win this week — they host Texas and Kentucky — would have them feeling mighty cozy.

Texas (17-11, 8-7; WAB rank: 44)
Profile Strengths: Strong high-end wins and quality metrics.
Profile Weaknesses: Have a Q3 loss.
Looking Ahead: Texas’ thunderous momentum came to a screeching halt with an 0-2 week. There is zero shame in losing at Georgia and against Florida, both Q1A games, but a win in either game might have lifted the Longhorns up a category. Instead, they remain near the cutline, and the mounting losses are a concern. This week brings two more Q1A challenges in the form of trips to Texas A&M and Arkansas. Huge opportunities, to be sure, but Texas will be underdogs in both.

The Rest

Locks: Gonzaga, Utah State
Should Be In: Saint Louis
In the Mix: Belmont, Miami (Ohio), New Mexico, Saint Mary’s, San Diego State, Santa Clara, VCU
On the Fringe: Boise State, Liberty, Nevada, South Florida

Should Be In

Saint Louis (25-3, 13-2 Atlantic 10; WAB rank: 36)
What They Need: The Billikens should probably be all locked up, but their current form (two shaky road losses) and some potentially harmful upcoming schedule landmines have us opting for the conservative route. SLU did take down VCU last week, an important victory for the A-10 title race. Coach Josh Schertz and forward Robbie Avila are a win away from Lock status, and they will be massive favorites at home against Duquesne (Saturday) and Loyola Chicago (Wednesday).

Saint Mary’s (26-4, 15-2 WCC; WAB rank: 27)
What They Need: Like SLU, Saint Mary’s could probably be bumped up to Lock. The worst-case scenario for the Gaels is a 26-6 record, adding losses to Gonzaga and in the WCC tournament. If that second defeat comes to Santa Clara, the Gaels are good to go. The only risk would be if it came against a WCC cellar-dweller, but even then, the metrics are probably too strong to keep Saint Mary’s out. The Gaels can render the discussion moot by knocking off Gonzaga in Moraga on Saturday.

In The Mix

Belmont (26-4, 16-3 Missouri Valley; WAB rank: 51)
Profile Strengths: 5-1 record vs. top two quadrants.
Profile Weaknesses: No Q1 games, three Q3 losses, terrible noncon SOS.
Looking Ahead: The Bruins are more than a curiosity at this point. Should they win out to 29-5 and lose in the MVC title game, they would have a legitimate case for inclusion. They might be at the mercy of other bid stealers, though. All they can do is win, and a Q2 road game at Illinois State on Sunday would offer a tangible profile boost.

Miami (Ohio) (28-0, 15-0 MAC; WAB rank: 32)
Profile Strengths: Undefeated!!, very good resume metrics.
Profile Weaknesses: Horrendous nonconference SOS, played zero Q1 games, awful quality metrics.
Looking Ahead: After two more emphatic MAC wins, the only thing preventing the Redhawks from elevating to Should Be In status is their remaining schedule. Each game is a landmine, and collecting two blemishes before the MAC tournament would massively shift Miami’s postseason outlook. On the other hand, though, a sweep this week — at Western Michigan, vs. Toledo — would guarantee Miami could not end with more than two losses. That might vault them into Lock status.

New Mexico (21-7, 12-5 Mountain West; WAB rank: 52)
Profile Strengths: 9-6 vs. top two quadrants.
Profile Weaknesses: Took a Q3 loss.
Looking Ahead: On Tuesday night at Nevada, New Mexico missed a big chance to add a third Q1 win to the slim top end of its profile. The weekend win at Fresno State does alter the outlook for a team that is snugly along the cutline as of today. Sweeping the upcoming homestand against San Diego State (Saturday) and Colorado State (Wednesday) would be enormous, setting up a possible “win and in” finale at Mountain West-leading Utah State.

San Diego State (19-8, 13-4 Mountain West; WAB rank: 53)
Profile Strengths: Excellent noncon SOS, .500 against the top two quadrants.
Profile Weaknesses: One Q3 loss, fringe resume metrics.
Looking Ahead: All things considered, it was a good week for the Aztecs. It could have been great, but a weekend road loss at Colorado State mutes the impact of shellacking Utah State on Wednesday night. San Diego State is still probably short where it needs to be, but two Q1 road chances — at New Mexico, at Boise State — could significantly alter where it stands a week from now. The Aztecs already beat both at home, but neither game was easy. Of course, earning at-large bids is not easy, either.

Santa Clara (23-7, 14-3 West Coast; WAB rank: 41)
Profile Strengths: Competitive metrics, solid Q1/Q2 record.
Profile Weaknesses: Worst loss in bubble group, only one Q1 win.
Looking Ahead: After missing the chance to sweep Saint Mary’s, Santa Clara becomes a fascinating WAB test case. The Broncos went just 1-3 against the Gaels and Gonzaga, and they did not beat an at-large caliber team in nonconference play. But the all-encompassing numbers say this is an NCAA Tournament team. Will they get the chance to prove it? That might require a semifinal win over Saint Mary’s at the WCC tournament.

VCU (21-7, 12-3 Atlantic 10; WAB rank: 48)
Profile Strengths: No bad losses, competitive metrics.
Profile Weaknesses: One Q1 win.
Looking Ahead: The Rams played 27 good minutes at SLU on Friday but were buried by a 24-4 Billikens run in the second half. As of this writing, VCU has gained a Q1 win with its neutral site victory over Virginia Tech just barely sneaking into that category. That helps, but the Rams are still in a precarious position and need to take care of business at home this week (vs. Fordham on Saturday, vs. George Mason on Tuesday). If they do, would winning at Dayton in the finale and making the finals of the A-10 tournament be enough? That would put them at 26-8 overall, likely with solid metrics. Let’s re-evaluate in a week.

The Bracket Central series is sponsored by E*Trade from Morgan Stanley.

The Athletic maintains full editorial independence. Sponsors have no control over or input into the reporting or editing process and do not review stories before publication.